Objective Reduction (OR)

"By reaching the quantum gravity threshold, each Objective Reduction (OR) event has a fundamental bearing on space-time geometry. One could say that a cascade of OR events charts an actual course of physical space-time geometry selections. Although gravitational forces between objects are exceedingly weak(feebler than, for example, electrical forces by some 40 orders of magnitude), there are significant reasons for believing that gravity has a fundamentalinfluence on the behavior of quantum systems as they evolve from the micro to the macro levels." "In the standard descriptions of quantum physics, randomness occurs in the events described as quantum state reductions – these being events which appear to take place when a quantum-level process gets magnified to a macroscopic scale." "In the Objective Reduction (OR) description, consciousness takes place if an organized system is able to isolate and sustain coherent super-positions until its quantum gravity threshold for space-time separation is met; it then self-reduces (non-computable). For consciousness to occur, self-reduction is essential …" "Thus, only very special circumstances could support consciousness:

1) High degree of coherence of a quantum state – a collective mass of particles in super-position for a time period long enough to reach threshold, and brief enough to be useful in thought processes.

2) Ability for the OR process to be at least transiently isolated from a ‘noisy’ environment until the spontaneous state reduction takes place.

3) Cascades of ORs to give a ‘stream’ of consciousness, huge numbers of OR events taking place during the course of a lifetime."

In any case, if there is a "frequency" of these wave-like occurrences described as ORs which comprise human thought, especially given the electro-chemical nature of the brain, then we ought to be able to construct a "receiver" that monitors those occurrences and in essence reads human minds. Taking this further, and it is important to recognize the fact that many current theorists believe that humans simply lack the mental capacity to understand human consciousness.Unfortunately, this explanation is one that human beings are incapable of understanding. Cognitive ability comes in degrees, and the hard problem may require a degree that lies beyond our limits, just as chess lies beyond the cognitive ability of dogs." The similarity of processes which appear to underpin our perceived universe is apparent from microcosm to macrocosm. If, as so many are beginning to say, information is indeed the fundamental "element" in our universe, the scope of what we know today to be "Information Systems" and/or "Information Technology" will change dramatically. Information Systems (IS) professionals could find themselves the ultimate managers of our known universe, manipulating probability-of-trueness levels of information elements to achieve desired results -–perhaps in an extension of our current approach to object oriented technologies.The pivotal concept here is how to manipulate the "probability of trueness" of any specific element of information. One factor that has been demonstrated to have an effect on the "position" of elements is sheer observation of those elements. It is conceivable that manipulating the frequency and intensity of "observation" is the variable required.One of the intriguing possibilities that springs to mind with regard to how this might occur is the advent of the internet. It has been theorized by a number of researchers that a "global brain" is under development through the evolving

network of computers connected on the net (Peter Russel, The Global Brain Awakens, McNaughton and Gunn, 1995). This global brain could certainly be viewed as a platform of unprecedented ability for widespread "observation", bringing elements of information into the awareness of a large population, and rapidly facilitating the movement of elements between "true" and "untrue" probability levels.

As work continues in the inter-related fields of quantum physics, Information Systems, and the study of human thought/consciousness, a number of incredibly profound issues will be presented to humanity. The emerging power of information management may bring with it the ability to alter the very nature of our universe.

Josef, let me ask a question as a naive philosopher: are you/they saying that 'observation' of information makes it more 'true'? ...I am thinking of observing the information that the world is flat does not seemingly make it flat, or observing that a bigger military/home defense force makes us safer does not seemingly make us safer.

Maybe Richard can make a new forum especially for all your mind-wobbling moments, Mr.Villafan. :)

Not a bad idea, Josef, please let us know if you write anywhere else. Thanks, Bill

What is consciousness? Some philosophers have contended that `qualia', or an experiential medium from which consciousness is derived, exists as a fundamental component of reality. Whitehead, for example, described the universe as being comprised of `occasions of experience'. To examine this possibility scientifically, the very nature of physical reality must be re-examined. We must come to terms with the physics of space–time — as is described by Einstein's general theory of relativity — and its relation to the fundamental theory of matter — as described by quantum theory. This leads us to employ a new physics of objective reduction: OR which appeals to a form of `quantum gravity' to provide a useful description of fundamental processes at the quantum/classical borderline. Within the OR scheme, we consider that consciousness occurs if an appropriately organized system is able to develop and maintain quantum coherent superposition until a specific `objective' criterion (a threshold related to quantum gravity) is reached; the coherent system then self-reduces (objective reduction: OR). We contend that this type of objective self-collapse introduces non-computability, an essential feature of consciousness. OR is taken as an instantaneous event — the climax of a self-organizing process in fundamental space–time — and a candidate for a conscious Whitehead-like `occasion' of experience. How could an OR process occur in the brain, be coupled to neural activities, and account for other features of consciousness? We nominate an OR process with the requisite characteristics to be occurring in cytoskeletal microtubules within the brain's neurons.

The sin of Egoism thus emcompasses all those errors that stem from your ego: lack of 'Objective Reduction OR', failing to think of your oponnent's ideas as carefully as you own, feeling fear, self-doubt, feeling 'over-awed' by your opponent's rating, being aware of people watching your in game in LittleGolem, thinking of how great your play is during the game and the point of view on thess forums, that,,that we can be without a point of view is a point of view...The new physics, quantum mechanics, tells us clearly that it is not possible to observe reality without changing it. The erasure of subjectivity in order to be objective is itself a subjective act. What else this continued consistency of winning take all, be?

more similar here? -

Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity by Alan D. Sokal Department of Physics

New York University

WOW!! Oniscoid, I do like you input very much.., about the OR SUB. thks

References:

Derrida's perceptive reply went to the heart of classical general relativity: The Einsteinian constant is not a constant, is not a center. It is the very concept of variability -- it is, finally, the concept of the game. In other words, it is not the concept of something -- of a center starting from which an observer could master the field -- but the very concept of the game ...Objective Reduction (OR). In mathematical terms, Derrida's observation relates to the invariance of the Einstein field equation under nonlinear space-time diffeomorphisms (self-mappings of the space-time manifold which are infinitely differentiable but not necessarily analytic). The key point is that this invariance group ``acts transitively'': this means that any space-time point, if it exists at all, can be transformed into any other. In this way the infinite-dimensional invariance group erodes the distinction between observer and observed; the of Euclid and the G of Newton, formerly thought to be constant and universal, are now perceived in their ineluctable historicity; and the putative observer becomes fatally de-centered, disconnected from any epistemic link to a space-time point that can no longer be defined by geometry alone.

The ideal of science, modelled on the objectifying quality of vision, has been to describe the world as a realm beyond the limits of the senses. And instrumentation has vastly extended these limits. The ancient Greek thinkers, and their Renaissance admirers, sought to distill out of the flux of phenomena the unalterable real aspects of matter. They set about to create a theoretical domain transcending sensory experience, yet this conceptual realm was in fact based on the visual sense. Scientific or objective description is supposed to take place from a "third-person" point of view. Yet all description is necessarily in the first person: from the point of view of "I". So-called objective description, which leaves out mention of the observer's experience or excludes conscious states of the observed organism, merely fails to acknowledge the consciousness of the observer. What is meant by "third person" is simply that the observer is talking about the external world, not about his personal experience. It cannot be pretended, however, that the observer has some way of knowing about the external world other than through personal experience. All observers stand in a first-person epistemic relation to the world-- either through the instrumentation of the observer's own body or through some external device which extends the agency and the epistemic relationship of the observer.

The fact that I can estimate the frequency of light either through my sensory experience or with a spectrometer does not place these measures on a different epistemic footing. The spectrometer may isolate frequency better, and measure it more precisely, than human vision. But the idea that the measuring system is objective, because it has no subjective viewpoint of its own, is absurd since it is not the device which is making the measurement but the observer.

Achx

On September 14, 2001, scientists at the Arecibo Observatory photographed a huge jet double the height of those previously observed, reaching around 80 km (50 miles) into the atmosphere. The jet was located above a thunderstorm over the ocean, and lasted under a second. Lightning was initially observed traveling up at around 50,000 m per second in a similar way to a typical blue jet, but then divided in two and speeded to 250,000 m / second to the ionosphere, where they spread out in a bright burst of light. This has to do with our changing DNA patterns. There is a transformation occuring in the very blueprint of our makeup. It will be established with the birth of the next root race - the 'Blue Rays'. The old memories can be retained within the new memory cells, and by those individuals and groups attuned to the new cells. But these transfered memories won't have the same intensity or memory charge as they had in the old cells. --the storage capacity will increase exponentially! In other words, they could take all the old memory, although perhaps slightly altered, and put them all on a little shelf within their total capacity. This is because they have such great volume by comparison. ... cosmic crystallography looks at the 3-dimensional apparent distribution of high redshift sources (e.g. galaxy clusters, quasars) in order to discover repeating patterns in the universal covering space, much like the repeating patterns of atoms observed in a crystal. "Pair Separation Histograms" (PSH) are in most cases able to detect a multiconnected topology of space, in the form of sharp spikes standing out above the noise distribution that is expected in the simply-connected case. ... However ... PSH may provide a topological signal only when the holonomy group of space has Clifford translations, a property which excludes all hyperbolic spaces. ...

Indeed, there are a lot of issues on Objective Reduction (OR), many of which have a lot of sides. There are a lot of issues in the LittleGolem's Forum too, many of which have a lot of sides. Statistically speaking, the odds that you are right about every issue you express an opinion on are nil. In light of this, it is a good idea to regularly consider the possibility that you might be wrong when dealing with others. Signs that you might be wrong include sane and respected people disagreeing with you, being repeatedly reverted, having an RfC or RFAr opened against you, or illustrated Common sense. In the event that you do not suffer from excessively Inmature cold comments from instigator, you may even come to recognize that you were wrong about something yourself. If this should occur, you are faced with a choice. Either you can admit your mistake, or you can be a Vick. The former is the better option. Consider publicly admitting your error, and even apologizing for it. Doing so will make you look like someone who can admit that they are wrong, and lend more weight to your words later on. It's also polite.

When someone admits that they are wrong, this is generally a good occasion to back off and to stop criticizing them for it. Remember to assume good faith. If they admit that they're wrong and go back to doing the exact same thing, or somebody put more woods into the fire; without apologizing to other players in general. They're just adding more descriminatories profanity coment against people's culture; that is one thing, but after an apology it is respectful to step back and give them a chance to show that they have learned some type of class.

It is also worth noting that admitting mistakes should be a voluntary process. Demanding apologies is a more or less worthless activit from Psycho-Abusers threatens to engulf it.- there again, come to think of it, having done a bit of work on this myself, he'd probably have attracted even more abuse :) Indeed, there are a lot of issues on Objective Reduction (OR), many of which have a lot of sides.

WakYu

Proverbs 26:4-5 states, "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit." The Objective Reduction (OR) is the art of the Universe, the unique expression, not of what we know, but an expression of who we are, who we can possibly be. Objective Reduction (OR) is not a function, something we can do, it is something we embody. It requires the totality of our existence. The Objective Reduction (OR), like the sculptor’s knife, like the words that come out of our mouth, shapes the future to come. We need to form society from our soul and spirit, not from our cleverness and evidence. In myths the hero is the one who conquers the dragon, not the one who is devoured by it. And yet, both have to deal with the same dragon. Also he is no hero who never met the dragon, or who, if he once saw it, declared afterwards that he saw nothing. Eventually, only one who has risked the fight with the dragon and is not overcome by it wins the hoard, the 'treasure hard to attain'. He alone has a genuine claim to self-confidence, for he has faced the dark ground of his self, and thereby has gained himself.... He has arrived at the inner certainty which makes him capable of self reliance, and attained what the alchemists called the unio mentalis.

If one examines postcapitalist constructivist theory, one is faced with a choice: either reject patriarchialist capitalism or conclude that truth is intrinsically impossible, but only if art is distinct from truth; otherwise, government is capable of truth. However, the premise of dialectic sublimation implies that expression is created by the collective unconscious, given that patriarchialist capitalism is invalid. The subject is contextualised into a prematerial textual theory that includes culture as a paradox.

(Brilliantly written crap from the postmodern generator:-)

or to put it another way, cats like plain crisps

Mr. Weed,

I couldn't disagree more. My cats loathe plain crisps...it's salted or nothing!

i find that very strange... meybe the plain crisps you tested it on weren't fresh? there again, could be you've got one of those cats that barks and wags its tail?

whoops - sorry - on rereading... yes of course - these days one assumes the crisps will be salted to a certain extent - and i've heard of moggies with a penchant for cheese and onion flavour - but as a rule of thumb...

... as nobody is playing the Game ; I would say I'm disapointed that nobody (or no multibody) since two weeks has anything to say abouts Objective Reduction (OR is Gold in French) or crisps (who are chips in French).

Come on Opiel, Wakai...

What about String Theory and M-Theory serious

or less serious but is a blincker possible (2664 best score)

Very Well!! [{String theory} Some literally have a hard time naming the fundamental particles of nature]. This infinite sea of energy is not all that is enfolded in the implicate order. Because the implicate order is the foundation> that has given birth to everything in our universe, at the very least it also contains every subatomic particle that has been or will be; every configuration** of matter, energy, life, and consciousness that is possible, from quasars to the brain of from the , to the that control the sizes and shapes of galaxies. And even this is not all it may contain. Bohm concedes that there is no reason to believe the implicate order is the end of things. There may be other undreamed of orders beyond it, infinite stages of further development...Take a moment to consider this. Look at your hand. Now look at the light streaming from the lamp beside you. And at the dog resting at your feet. you are not merely made of the same things. You are the same thing. One thing. Unbroken. One enormous something that has extended its uncountable arms and appendages into all the apparent objects, atoms, restless oceans, and twinkling stars in the cosmos.

"What gets measured gets done." Good thinkers do not necessarily think harder, longer, or more exactly; they have simply learned to think in directions that are more likely to be productive.

**[String theory is so important that it must be practised at the expense of all other theory. There are two manifestations of this: string theorists have been hired into faculty positions at a disproportionally high level not necessarily commensurate with ability in all cases, and the younger string theorists are usually not well educated in particle physics. Some literally have a hard time naming the fundamental particles of nature. Both of these manifestations are worrying for the long-term future of our field].

Opiel

That is really well said.

I completely agree with you.

You must be a specialist in physics to have such a clear view.

Having people boasting in a field is always worrying.

bump